| Popis: |
This chapteroffers an example of the role that hypothetical jurors play for another critical legal actor: federal judges. Drawing at length on one criminal case, it examines a judge’s elaboration of hypothetical jurors’ perspectives when applying a discretionary rule of evidence (FRE 403). This rule considers whether the probative value of relevant evidence is significantly outweighed by its potential to unfairly prejudice jurors. Though real jurors adjudicated the case, the judge relied on imagined jurors to dramatically change the course of the trial. As part of this exercise, the prosecutors in the case came to appreciate that competing visions of justice can be claimed in an imagined jury’s name and caught a glimpse of what justice in the shadow of a judge, rather than jury, might look like. |
